The Forum > Article Comments > Cruise missile targeting of Syria > Comments
Cruise missile targeting of Syria : Comments
By Peter Coates, published 29/8/2013The US and allies seems almost certain to use cruise missiles against the Syrian regime, but what can they sensibly target?
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- ...
- 23
- 24
- 25
-
- All
Posted by halduell, Thursday, 29 August 2013 10:41:29 AM
| |
The UN inspectors who were called in to investigate the chemical weapon attack, have allegedly found signs of chemical substances. They appear to have little if any intention of ascertaining who was responsible for the attack.
That Israel army intelligence has gone public with its alleged 'evidence' that the Assad army was to blame is indeed suspicious. Would the USA become involved? Now that the US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan have petered or are about to peter out, the US arms movement presumably would be pressing for new skirmishes so as to boost their arms sales -- the same could be said of the UK and French counterparts. Posted by Raycom, Thursday, 29 August 2013 12:35:19 PM
| |
Our PM apparently thinks that his electoral prospects would improve by calling for action against the Assad regime (see article ' Rudd says 'overwhelming case' for international response to Syria chemical weapons massacre', Read more: http://www.news.com.au/world-news/middle-east/rudd-says-8216overwhelming-case8217-for-international-response-to-syria-chemical-weapons-massacre/story-fnh81ifq-1226706503974) :
"THE Syrian regime used chemical weapons on its own people and must pay a price, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said today after emerging from a briefing on the crisis. He said it was the Federal Government's belief "the Syrian regime is responsible for these chemical weapons attacks on the Syrian people". "The evidence, in our judgement, is now overwhelming," he said." Posted by Raycom, Thursday, 29 August 2013 12:56:59 PM
| |
This morning, Rudd declared his support for plans to attack Syria. As he has no proof that the Assad regime was responsible for the gas atrocities, and as he acknowledges that the UN will not sanction such an attack which will cause more civilian casualties, isn't our prime minister a war criminal?
Posted by Leslie, Thursday, 29 August 2013 12:59:55 PM
| |
Here is what we already know: The Syria crisis is swiftly escalating with the advent of yet another unverified chemical weapons attack on the civilian population which is being used as a broad permit for the Obama Administration to enter into open operations against the Assad government. A previous chemical attack at the beginning of this summer was left unverified, though the establishment went to great lengths to convince the American public the Assad government was responsible. It certainly didn’t help that the UN was relying purely on “samples” from a French evening newspaper called Le Monde rather than an officially sanctioned source, and that the UN was forced to acknowledge that the Syrian insurgents may have been involved.
Today, the mainstream media and the U.S. government references “strong indications that Syria’s government used chemical weapons in attacks that opposition groups claimed killed more than 1,100 people” as if their version of events is already considered concrete reality. But where are these “strong indications”? Where is this unassailable evidence of Assad’s involvement? The American public hasn’t been given a scrap of verifiable data concerning the attack and its origin. Once again, we are being asked to accept on simple “faith” that our government is telling us the truth and that military intervention must be supported. Here are some facts: The Syrian insurgency is made up primarily of Al Qaeda operatives (terrorists and criminals). The CIA trained and supported these operatives using Benghazi as a base for at least a year before the Benghazi attacks. Syrian insurgents have been caught on numerous occasions committing startling crimes, including the torture and murder of civilians, and the mutilation of prisoners and even their corpses. Captured Syrian soldiers are commonly executed. The U.S. government continues to support the insurgents despite their death squad mentality, supplying heavy weapons including anti-aircraft missiles. Syrian insurgents impose their own fanatical system of theological governance in regions where they have total control. Where does this all lead: To chaos similar to that in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt etc. Long term it’s all about a preemptive strike on Iran. Posted by Geoff of Perth, Thursday, 29 August 2013 2:00:13 PM
| |
Peter, anyone who expects anything sensible from the U.S. and its Imperial Allies is deluded!
Posted by David G, Thursday, 29 August 2013 2:04:25 PM
|
This is far from certain. Any intel from Israel is by definition suspect as that country has been clamouring for an attack on Syria for years, if not decades. Now it seems that the rather suspicious Israeli communication intercepts are of alleged confused talk between Syrian military units AFTER the alleged attack happened.
Would a strike as envisaged be legal under U.S. domestic law without congressional approval?
Who will join the fray? In Europe, apparently Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany and Norway have spoken out against any use of force against Syria. Austria has blocked its airspace for any air operation related to Syria, and while the Arab League blamed the chemical incident on the Syrian government, it has not endorsed any punitive measures.
Even that appallingly weak creature, Cameron of Great Britain, is facing mounting pressure to pull his head in.
Could all this talk of imminent war be Obama posturing before meeting Putin and others in St Petersberg in a few days time?
And who in their right mind would launch a cruise missile against supposedly know locations of chemical war material?
This rush to yet another war has been slowed down. Hopefully saner heads will now have a chance to be heard.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/ is well worth a read on this and other matters.